; 299 
3 V5 

py 1 



UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
BULLETIN No. .1045 

Contribation from the Bureau of Plant Industry 
WM. A. TAYLOR, Chief 



Washington, D. C. 



March 18, 1922 



THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP 

By 

H. N. VINALL, Agronomist 
Office of Forage-Crop Investigations 



CONTENTS 



Early History of the Sunflower 1 

Present Distribution 2 

Cultivation in (he United States 2 

Areas Suited to the Production of 

Sunflowers 4 

Value of Sunflowers in the Semiarid 

Regions 5 

Soil Relations and Effect on the Fol- 
lowing Crop 7 

Varieties 7 

Growing Sunflowers for Silage 9 

Date of Seeding 10 

Method and Rate of Seeding .... 10 

Cultivation and Irrigation 11 

Harvesting Methods 12 

Time to Cut Sunflowers 13 



Page 

Filling the Silo 15 

Yields of Silage 17 

Feeding Value of Sunflower Silage ... 20 

Composition and Digestibility .... 20 

Palatability 21 

Color, Texture, and Odor 23 

Acidity of the Silage 23 

Results with Dairy Cattle 23 

Feeding Tests with Beef Cattle ... 26 
Use of Sunflower Silage in Feeding 

Sheep 27 

Feeding Sunflower Silage to Hogs . . 29 

Sunflowers as a Soiling Crop 29 

Diseases of Sunflowers 30 

Insects Attacking Sunflowers 31 

Literature Cited 31 




WASHINGTON 
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

1922 



V^V 



s^^^ 

M^^. 



LIBRARY OF CONQRI88 

.•••r,"'"r'\/C'> 



UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 




BULLETIN No. 1045 



Contribution from the Bureau of Plant Industry 
WM. A. TAYLOR, Chief 




J^f^'^t. 



Washington, D. C. 



March 18, 1922 



THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. 



ist. Office of Forage-Crop Investigations. 



By H. jN. Vinall, Agronom 

Early history of the sunflower 

Present distribution 

Cultivation in the United States 

Areas suited to tlie production 

of sunflowers 

Value of sunflowers in the semi- 
arid regions 

Soil relations and effect on the 

following crop 

Varieties 

Growing- sunflowers for silage 

Date of seeding 

Method and rate of seeding 

Cultivation and irrigation 

Harvesting methods 

Time to cut sunflowers 

Filling the silo 



EARLY HISTORY OF THE SUNFLOWER. 

The common sunflower {Helianthus annuus) is o;enerally recog- 
nized as native of North America, although its natural range of dis- 
tribution extends southward to Peru. It was one of the food plants 
of the American Indians (i^? P- -il^) N the seeds being eaten raw or 
pounded up with other seeds, then made into flat cakes and dried in 
the sun. The sunflower was grown as early as 1597 in the gardens 
at Madrid, Spain. The Spaniards probably obtained the seed from 
Peru, since it was given the name " Peruvian sunflower " by De Lobel, 
a Flemish botanist, who published a description of the sunflower in 
1576. Champlain in 1615 found the Indians in the vicinity of Geor- 
gian Bay cultivating the sunflower. The oil which they obtained 
from the seeds was used on their hair. 



CONTENTS. 




Page. 




Page. 


1 


Vields of silage 


17 


2 


Feeding value of sunflower silage 


20 


2 


Composition and digestibility- - 


20 




Palatability 


21 


4 


Color, texture, and odor 


23 




Acidity of the silage 


23 


5 


Results with dairy cattle 


23 




Feeding tests with beef cattle 


26 


7 


Use of sunflower silage in feed- 




7 


ing sheep 


27 


9 


Feeding sunflower silage to 




10 


hogs._: 


29 


10 


Sunflowers as a soiling crop 


29 


11 


Disease-s of sunflowers 


30 


12 


Insects attaicfcing sunflowers 


31 


13 


■ Literature cited 


31 


15 


. . 





'The serial numbers (italic) in parentheses refer to "Literature cited" at the end 
of this bulletin. 

79165°— 22 1 



2 BULLETIX 1045, U. S. DEPAETME:NT OF AGEICULTURE. 

The suntiower under cultivation has been widely used as an orna- 
mental, and its seeds are valued as a feed for birds and poultry. In 
addition, the seeds are used as human food, and when pressed cold 
Ijroduce a fairly good table oil. The resulting seed cake, after the 
oil has been expressed, is used as a concentrate in feeding cattle and 
horses. The above-mentioned uses are largelj^ responsible for the 
widespread distribution of the sunflower. 

PRESENT DISTRIBUTION. 

The sunflower plant is grown throughout Xorth America, from 
the southern Provinces of Canada to the Canal Zone. It is to be 
found also in most parts of South America, but more especially along 
the west coast from Colombia to Chile. In Australia, New Zealand, 
South Africa, Egypt, the ]\rediterranean region of Europe, India, 
and China the sunflower is grown to a limited extent. It has reached 
its highest development and its greatest usefulness in Russia, where 
several important varieties have been developed. It is grown exten- 
sively there for its seeds and the oil therefrom, both being consumed 
as food, and the stalks are utilized as fuel by the peasants.^ Next to 
Russia, Hungary was perhaps the largest producer of sunflowers. 
There were many mills in that country which were equipped espe- 
cially for extracting the oil from sunflower seeds, and the oil content 
of the Plungarian seed was higher on the average than that of seed 
grown in Russia.^ 

CULTIVATION IN THE UNITED STATES. 

Although the sunflower is a native of the United States and was 
cultivated by the Indians, earl}^ settlers seem to have made little use 
of it as a crop plant. Most of the sunflowers grown in early days 
were harvested for seed, but insects, such as cutworms and also 
those which live on the seeds, often made the crop an unprofitable 
one. The United States Department of Agriculture investigated the 
production of sunflowers in the United States and published the 
results in 1901 as Bulletin 60 of the Division of Chemistry. 

At that time there were no mills producing sunflower oil, and the 
crop was being utilized largely as feed for cage birds and poultry, 
the seed only being harvested. In 1895 and 1896 large areas of 
sunflowers were grown in southern Indiana near Madison. Accord- 

- statistics publislied in thie New York Dnig Reporter in 1883 claimed a total produc- 
tion of 228,000,000 pounds of seed in Russia from an area of 216,000 acres, mostly in 
Kielce, Podolia, and the district of Bruiteh in Veronez. 

3 A good summary of the information regarding the production of si'.nflower oil and 
seed cake in Russia and Hungary is to be found in the articles of Richard Windisch in 
Landw. Vers. Stat., Bd. 57, p. 305-316, and Dr. Th. Kosutany in the same pulilication, 
Bd. 43, p. 253-260. 



THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP, 3 

ing to the United States Department of Agriculture Market Re- 
porter of February 5, 1921, there are now three important seed-pro- 
ducing areas in the United States. These are southeastern Missouri, 
southern Illinois, and the San Joaquin Valley of California. The 
1920 seed crop in these three areas was estimated at 9.85(),()00 pounds. 

The New York Agricultural Experiment Station (Geneva) re- 
ported some results with sunflowers in 1883, the Vermont station 
in 1893, and the Maine station in 1895 and 1896. The Canadian 
Experimental Farms Eeport for 1893 also discussed the culture of 
sunflowers in Ontario and other southern Provinces. The last- 
mentioned work was devoted mainly to studying the value of the 
silage mixture originated by Prof. James W. Robertson, of Ottawa, 
Canada, and designed to produce a silage of such composition that 
the quantity of grain needed in the ration could be reduced. Corn 
and some legumes, such as the horse bean or soy bean, were grown 
together in the field, and when ready for the silo the crop from 2 
acres of this mixture was put in the silo with the sunfloAver heads from 
half an acre. If it was found desirable to grow the legumes and 
corn in separate fields ; then the mixture was made up by combining 
the crops as follows: One-fourth acre of sunflower heads, one-half 
acre of horse beans, soy beans, or some other legume, and 1 acre 
of corn. 

Because of the high protein content of the legume and the high fat 
content of the sunflower seed, this silage mixture possessed a high 
feeding value. It was claimed that the Robertson mixture produced 
results equal to those of pure corn silage and required 4 pounds less 
of concentrate, such as grain or meal, with each 50 pounds of 
silage fed. 

In growing sunflowers for tests of the Robertson mixture in the 
New England States and Canada most of the investigators obtained 
a larger yield of sunflowers (total crop) than they did of corn. Some 
of them also recognized the possibility of utilizing the entire plant 
for silage. Prof. J. N. Bartlett, of the Maine Agricultural Experi- 
ment Station, says that " the very large total yield of sunflowers 
(48.000 pounds per acre in 1896) would give them a high rank 
among coarse fodder plants for silage material." Notwithstanding 
the heavy tonnage produced by the sunfloAvers and this apparent 
realization of the value of such a crop for silage, none of these sta- 
tions ever seriously attempted to make use of the wdiole plant by 
ensiling. The idea seemed to prevail in the minds of all these in- 
\estigators that there could be very little food value in the coarse 
woody stalks of the sunflower. 

Tests of the feeding value of the Robertson mixture were made 
with dairy cows at the Vermont station and also in Canada. Al- 
though the quantity of grain fed with the Robertson silage was 



4 BULLETIN 1045^ U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGBICULTTJEE, 

less than with the corn silage, the cows produced approximately 
equal quantities of milk and butter. The Canadian authorities re- 
ported that the butter made from the sunflower mixture had a richer 
flavor and higher color than that from corn silage. Instructions 
were issued to Canadian farmers regarding the growing and utiliza- 
tion of sunflowers in the Robertson silage mixture, and it received 
considerable attention for a few years. The practice of making 
silage in this way did not become established in American agricul- 
ture, however, and little has been heard about it during the past 
10 years. 

Outside of the experiments carried out in Maine, Vermont, and 
New York, there has been but little investigation of the value of sun- 
flowers in the United States until recently, although desultory trials 
of the crop have been reported by New Hampshire, Nebraska, Colo- 
rado, and a few other States. In 1915 the Montana Agricultural 
Experiment Station grew a small acreage of sunflowers under irriga- 
tion at Bozeman. The results were so satisfactory that the plantings 
were enlarged in 1916, and the crop after being ensiled was fed to 
dairy cattle. This preliminary test, described in Bulletin 118 of the 
Montana Agricultural Experiment Station, demonstrated the high 
feeding value of sunflower silage and resulted in a widespread inter- 
est in the crop. Since the publication of this report numerous other 
States, as well as the United States Department of Agriculture, have 
experimented with sunflowers rather extensively as a silage crop. 

AREAS SUITED TO THE PRODUCTION OF SUNFLOWERS. 

Sunflowers are widely distributed in nature and can be grown suc- 
cessfully in nearly every part of the United States. Their value in 
any region, however, depends moie on the measure of success attained 
in the production of other crops than on their own adaptation to the 
local climatic conditions. Thus, it is doubtful whethei- sunflowers 
will ever be popular for a silage in the central and southern Great 
Plains, because the sorghums do so well there, nor in the corn belt, 
because corn so well fills the need for a silage crop. In the South- 
eastern States corn, sorghum, Japanese cane, pearl millet, and other 
silage crops are well adapted to the climatic conditions, and sun- 
flowers are not likely to find a place. 

In the extreme northern part of the United States or at high alti- 
tudes in the Western States where the temperatures during the grow- 
ing season are relatively low, corn, sorghum, and other crops do not 
jj'toduce heavy yields for silage. In such situations the sunflower is 
recognized as an extremely valuable silage crop, and the acreage de- 
voted to its production is increasing rapidly. Now that feeding ex- 
periments have demonstrated the high quality of this silage, it is 
probable that the sunflower will be grown quite widely in the New 



THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. 5 

Kngland States, northern New York, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Min- 
nesota, in North Dakota, Montana, Washington, and Oregon, and 
also in some of the high valleys of the Rocky Mountain region, such 
as the San Luis Valley of Colorado. 

Sunflowers have been found much more resistant to frost than corn. 
An observer in Michigan claims that they will " push back the frost 
line three weeks" in that State, A correspondent in New York 
writes that his sunflowers were green in the fall two weeks after corn 
had been killed by frost. These observations explain why sunflowers 
succeed in the high altitudes of Colorado and other Western States 
where frosts often occur during the growing season. 




Fig. 1. — A field in Ellis County, Kans., overrun by wild sunflowers during the wet season 

of 1915. 



VALUE OF SUNFLOWERS IN THE SEMIARID REGIONS. 

On account of the fact that sunflowers grow wild in western Kan- 
sas (fig. 1), Nebraska, South Dakota, and North Dakota, as well as 
in eastern Montana, Wyoming, and Colorado, it was anticipated that 
they would be important as a silage crop in dry regions. This has 
not proved to be the case. The yields at dry-land stations south of 
the Dakotas have not been large enough to warrant their production 
under cultivation. Field tests show that the sorghums give much 
higher yields under such conditions. 

At the Fort Hays Experiment Station, Hays, Kans., sunflowers 
were grown first in 1913. This was an unusually dry year and the 
plants made a very poor showing. None of them grew over a foot 
and a half high, and the yield was small. The better varieties of 
sorghum under the same conditions made a yield of '2 to 2^ tons of 



6 BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

silage per acre. Sunflowers were not grown again at Hays until 
1920. The rainfall was fairly abundant that year, and the general 
crops were good. Sunflowers suft'ered from rust and insects and again 
made a very poor showing in comparison with the sorghums. 

At Akron, Colo., where the altitude is greater than at Hays, Kans., 
sunflowers were tested in 1911 and 1912. Only seed yields were ob- 
tained in those years, but the growth was good and insects gave little 
trouble. The estimated total crop was about three-fourths that of the 
best varieties of forage sorghums. 

At Amarillo, Tex., sunflowers were grown in 1911, 1912, and 1913. 
The first two years the crop was fairly good, but the yield was hardly 
more than half that of the sorghums. In 1913 the crop was almost 
entirely destroyed by insects. In the semiarid region of the southern 
Great Plains the value of sunfloAvers as a silage crop is sure to be 
limited by the presence of numerous insects which attack the plant. 

The Montana Agricultural Experiment Station made some tests of 
sunflowers on dry-land farms in 1918 (^, p. 9). The average yield 
of silage on 13 different farms in eight counties was 10.3 tons per 
acre. There was no basis for a comparison of this yield of sunflowers 
with that of corn grown under similar conditions. The conclusion 
at the Montana station, however, was that considering the low sea- 
sonal rainfall the yield obtained was quite satisfactory and "that 
sunflowers are promising dry-land forage producers." This is per- 
haps true in Montana, where the temperatures are low during the 
growing season and sorghum and long-season varieties of corn can 
not be grown. 

Sunflowers were grown for ensilage in 1920 at the United States 
Sheep Experiment Station near Dubois, Idaho," at an elevation of 
5,700 feet, on the range land of the station by dry-land farming 
methods. The land is of lava-rock formation, and the area available 
for cultivation is limited. Although the annual precipitation is about 
16 inches, it was so dry in 1920 that wheat on the farmed lands adja- 
cent to the sheep reserve was a total failure. Regardless of this fact, 
the sunflowers yielded between 4:^ and 5 tons of ensilage per acre. 

To obtain a maximum crop of sunflowers by dry-land farming Mr. 
McWhorter advises the following procedure : 

(1) Summer fallow. Plow the land the previous spring. Keep the plowed 
area free from weeds and covered by a dust mulch throughout the summer and 
fall. 

* The work at this station is conducted by the Bureau of Animal Industry of the 
United States Department of Agriculture. Mr. V. O. McWhorter, who is in immediate 
charge of the station, has kindly furnished, through Mr. D. A. Spencer, senior animal 
husbandman in sheep and goat investigations, a preliminary statement of the results 
obtained with sunflowers. All future statements in this bulletin I'egarding work at the 
Dubois station are based on this report. 



THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP, 7 

(2) Plant early. Plant the sunflower seed in a well-stirred yet firm bed as 
early in the spring as the condition of the ground will permit. Although heavy 
freezing is injurious to the young plants, light frosts do not hurt sunflowers. 

(3) Htirrow. When the young plants begin to appear, use a spike-tooth har- 
row adjusted for shallow cultivation. 

(4) Thin the plants in the rows. Make the rows as far apart as corn is 
usually planted. When the shoots are well started, thin to one or two plants 
to the hill, 30 to 36 inches apart in the row. 

(5) Cultivate thoroughly. Cultivate lightly with an ordinary corn cultivator 
as often as needed. 

SOIL RELATIONS AND EFFECT ON THE FOLLOWING CROP. 

No very definite information regarding the behavior of sunflowers 
on different soil types is available. The best yields are obtained on 
rich clay loams well supplied with himius, but the crop has been 
grown successfully on sandy soil in northern Michigan and on poor 
clay soils in West Virginia. Sunflowers will thrive on any soil which 
will produce a good crop of corn. 

It was observed on the fields of the Washington Agricultural Ex- 
periment Station (-/7, p. 11) in 1919 and 1920 that the outside rows of 
the sunflower plats next to the corn made a more vigorous growth 
than rows in the centers of the plats. Conversely, the corn rows next 
the sunflower plats were less vigorous than the rows in the centers 
of the plats. This seemed to indicate an ability on the part of the 
sunflowers to obtain a greater portion of the plant food and soil 
moisture than corn when grown in competition with that crop. Tlie 
plats which produced corn and sunflowers in 1919 were seeded to 
wheat in 1920. The average yield of wiieat on the corn plat's was 
33.78 bushels and on the sunflower plats 28.36 bushels per acre. These 
results at the Washington station indicate that sunflowers are more 
exhaustive of the plant food and moisture in the soil than corn. 
This can be accounted for in most part by the larger tonnage obtained 
from the sunflowers. More experiments of this kind are necessary 
before definite conclusions are possible. 

VARIETIES. 

The principal variety of the sunflower now grown in the United 
States for silage purposes is the Mammoth Russian. This variety 
usually has a single stalk with comparatively few branches and one 
head 6 to 12 inches in diameter. The seeds are approximately half 
an inch long and one-fourth to five-sixteenths of an inch wide. They 
vary in color from almost pure white to black ; most of them, however, 
are white with longitudinal streaks or bands of gray or black. The 
Mammoth Russian is a vigorous heavy-stemmed variety with large 
leaves and produces heavy crops of seed. 



8 



BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 



Wiley {19) says that three principal varieties are grown in Russia: 
One with large white seeds, valued for its high oil production; one 
with smaller black seeds, which are sweeter and regarded as best for 
eating; and the intermediate form with striped seeds, used both for 
food and for oil production. 

The common wild sunflower of the United States often has a much- 
branched stalk (fig. 2) , with numerous heads 3 to 4 inches in diameter. 
The yield of silage produced by this plant when grown on rich soil 
under cultivation is usually somewhat less than that obtained from 
the Mammoth Russian varietv under the same conditions. At Red- 




FiG. -. — Two rows on the left, Mammoth liussian isunllovvcrs ; two rows ou the right, wild 
sunflowers, Redfleld, S. Dak. Both varieties were seeded on April 28, 1920,, and photo- 
graphed in August. 

field, S. Dak., in 1920 the total crop, green weight, of the wild sun- 
flower was 13.9 tons per acre, while the Mammoth Russian in an 
adjoining plat yielded 15.2 tons per acre. 

There has been no extensive development of sunflower varieties 
in the United States. The seed trade has advertised at times six 
or eight supposedly different varieties, but many of these are only 
slightly differing strains or selections of the same variety. Probably 
the most extensive varietal trial made was that of the Department of 
Agriculture of Ontario, Canada. In 1894 and 1895 seven varieties 
Avere under test at Ottawa.^ These A^arieties, Helianthus r/lohosus, 

6 Ann. Rpt., Dept. of Agr., Ontario, v. I, p. 261. 1895. 



THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP, 9 

Texas Silver Queen, Black Giant, Mammoth Russian Giant, Com- 
mon, Double California, and Silver and Gold, yielded in the order 
named 10.63 to 4.87 tons per acre except the last-named variety, 
which was tested only in 1895 and produced in that year at the 
rate of 11.39 tons per acre. These same varieties were continued 
under test in 1896, but a poor stand was obtained, and the years 
results therefore were not included in the averages. The seed for 
these tests ordinarily was purchased from seed houses in the United 
States. 

Notwithstanding: the fact that some of these varieties made a 
very o^ood showing, most of them were discarded and only three, 
the Black Giant, Mammoth Russian, and White Beauty, were grown 
in subsequent years. In the report for 1897 this action is explained 
as follows : "As some of these varieties, however, did not give satis- 
factory results nearly all of them were dropped from the list." 
Since a number of the seven varieties, such as the HelimitKus glo- 
hosus and Texas Silver Queen, made larger yields than any of the 
varieties contained in the tests, it is evident that some consideration 
other than the yield must have been responsible for the action of 
the Ontario officials in discontinuing the tests of those varieties. 
The average yield, green weight, of the varieties included in the 
test for 16 years was Black Giant, 22.3; Mammoth Russian, 17.8; 
and White Beauty, 16.5 tons per acre. 

The Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station conducted a va- 
riety test of sunflowers in 1918, but this test developed quite largely 
into a question of rust resistance.** The Mantica, developed by 
Luther Burbank ; the Kaeurpher. from South America ; the Mam- 
moth Russian; and the Double Mixed were tested. Of these va- 
rieties the Kaeurpher was the only one which proved rust resistant. 
More experimental work with varieties will have to be conducted 
before a decision can be reached as to the best variety for silage 
purposes. 

GROWING SUNFLOWERS FOR SILAGE. 

Only within the past decade have sunflowers been grown extensively 
in the United States for silage. In growing the crop for this pur- 
j)ose it is, of course, important to use cultural methods that will 
yield the largest tonnage. To attain this result it is usually neces- 
sary to plant more thickly than where a seed crop is the object. 

The same treatment of the soil that prepares the surface for corn 
planting will answer for sunflowers. The ground is usually plowed 
in the spring and worked down with a spike-tooth harrow, or if fall 

« Mich. Agr. Exp. Sta. Quar. BuL, v. 3, no. 3, Feb., 1920, p. 128-129. 
79165°— 22 2 



10 BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPAETMENT OF AGRICULTUKE. 

plowed it can be put into condition for planting by disking in the 
early spring. 

DATE OF SEEDING. 

The best date to plant sunflowers of course varies with the locality. 
In the Upper Peninsula of Michigan at tlie Chatham Experiment 
Station (i5, p. 50) it was found that seeding May 26 gave a larger 
yield and a better quality of silage than on June 2 and 9. 

At the West Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station, Morgan- 
town, W. Va. (5), June 5 proved a satisfactory date for seeding. 
At the Montana Agricultural Experiment Station at Bozeman {4, 
p. 9), seedings were made each week in 1918 from April 29 to June 
10. The largest yields were obtained from seed sown on the earliest 
date. Seeded on April 29 the plants appeared above ground in 
12 days and the yield m^ as 39,7 tons of silage per acre ; sown one month 
later, May 29, the young plants were up in 5 days and the yield 
was 36.8 tons, green weight, per acre ; sown June 10 the plants were 
up in 3 days and the yield was 22 tons, green weight, per acre. The 
seedings made between April 29 and May 29 gave lower yields than 
the May 29 seeding, although they were higher than the yield for 
June 10. The recommendations of the Montana station, based on 
the rather inconsistent results obtained in 1918, are to defer seeding 
in the higher altitudes until the ground is warm and in good condi- 
tion. 

On the Scottsbluff Reclamation Project Experiment Farm. Mitch- 
ell, Nebr., good results were obtained from seedings made on May 
24 {8, p. 25). At the experiment stations at Akron, Colo., Hays, 
Kans., and Amarillo, Tex., seedings have been made from May 
15 to June 15. 

These date-of-seeding tests indicate that sunflowers may be sown 
at the same time the farmer plants corn. 

METHOD AND RATE OF SEEDING. 

In early experiments with sunflowers in Maine, Vermont, New 
York, and in Canada the seedings were usually made with a corn 
planter in rows 3 feet apart. It was advised that not more than 
three or four seeds be dropped in each foot of row space. In some 
cases the plats were thinned so that the plants stood 8 to 12 inches 
apart in the row. 

In later experiments carried on in West Virginia, Michigan, Mon- 
tana, Nebraska, and other western points the ordinary grain drill 
has been found better suited for seeding sunflowers than the corn 
planter. The required space between the rows is accomplished by 
stopping up a certain number of holes or feeds in the drill box. In 
general, the largest yields and the best quality of silage have been 



THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. 11 

obtained when the rows were 24 to 30 inches apart. For such seed- 
ings 6 to 8 pounds of seed per acre are required. 

At the Michigan station (io, p. 50) sunflowers were seeded in rows 
6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, and 42 inches apart. The best yields were ob- 
tained from the 30-inch rows. At Huntley, Mont. (/, p. 12-14), 
sunflowers drilled in rows 20 inches apart produced 37.6 tons silage 
per acre; in rows 30 inches apart, 32.9 tons; and in rows 40 inches 
apart, 31.0 tons per acre. At Bozeman, Mont. (4, p. 6, 7), sun- 
flowers were seeded in rows 8, 20, 24, 30, 36, and 42 inches apart, 
the quantity of seed varying from 30 to 4 pounds per acre, according 
to the width of row. The average yield of silage for the two years 
1917 and 1918 was highest in the 36-inch rows, 44.1 tons ])er acre. 
The 8-inch rows were second, with a yield of 39.8 tons per acre, and 
the 30-inch rows ranked third, with 33.6 tons of silage per acre. 

Other experiments designed to determine the comparative value 
of planting in hills were carried out at Huntley and Bozeman, Mont. 
Sunflowers were planted in hills 6 and 12 inches apart in all the 
different row widths at Huntley and in hills 4, 8, and 12 inches apart 
in each of the row widths, 24, 30, and 36 inches, at Bozeman. At 
Huntley the average silage yield of the drilled plats in the three 
different row widths was 33.8 tons per acre ; for the 6-inch hills, 30.6 
tons; and for the 12-inch hills, 30.2 tons per acre. At Bozeman 
(4, p. 7, 8), although the highest single yield reported. 44.1 tons 
per acre, was from drilled rows 36 inches apart and the lowest, 18.2 
tons per acre, from hills 42 inches apart each way, the averages 
showed larger yields for the plats planted in hills than for those 
drilled. The actual difference in yield, however, was small. The 
average for the three row widths in drilled seedings was 34.8 tons 
of silage per acre ; for the rows planted in hills 4 inches apart, 36.2 
tons; in hills 8 inches apart, 35.3 tons; and in hills 12 inches apart, 
35.7 tons per acre. 

The results at the two stations are contradictory, and further work 
will be necessary to clear up the value of these two methods. It is 
somewhat easier to drill the seed in the row than to plant in hills 
at the distances obtaining in these experiments. It is evident from 
the experiments already completed that where the hills are separated 
by a considerable distance, as they are in checkrowed corn, the yields 
are appreciably smaller than in drilled rows. 

CULTIVATION AND IRRIGATION. 

If a crust forms on the soil before the plants come through or 
immediately afterwards, a light harrowing will help to obtain a 
good stand. After the plants are 4 to 8 inches tall the ordinary 
corn cultivator may be used, just as with corn. In some cases, like 



12 



BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, 



that reported by the West Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station, 
the growth is so rapid that only one cultivation is necessary, after 
which the plants shade the ground so thoroughly that weeds can not 
grow. Ordinarily, however, two or three cultivations are necessary. 
At the Huntley, Mont., experiment farm three irrigations were 
given sunflowers seeded May 21, 1918, water being applied uniformly 
to the field on July 9, August 2. and August 18 (7, p. 12-14). In 
1917 five irrigations Avere given. The frequency and character of 
cultivations and irrigations will necessarily have to be determined to 
a large degree by the grower. The large growth produced and the 
consequent high rate of water loss in dry regions means a correspond- 
ingly high water requirement. 




Fig. 3. — Hai-vesling sunflowers for silage with a row binder equipped witli an elevator to 
carry the bundles directly into a header barge. 

HARVESTING METHODS. 

The most efficient method of harvesting sunflowers for silage where 
the crop has not lodged badly and the stalks are not too large in 
diameter is with the ordinary corn or row binder. This machine 
ties the stalks in bundles, making it easier to load and transport them 
to the silage cutter. Everything possible should be done to reduce 
to a minimum the handwork required. Farm laborers dislike to 
handle sunflowers on account of the resinous exudation on the stems, 
especially where they are cut or bruised, and also because of the 
rough surfaces of the stems and leaves. 

At the Dubois (Idaho) sheep station an elevator was devised to 
carry the bundles directly from the row binder into a header barge. 
(Fig. 3.) Sunflower plants 8 to 9 feet tall were handled by the 



THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP, 



13 



binder with this loader attachment. A machine thus equipped re- 
ckices the hand labor to a minimum. 

Where the crop has lodged or a row binder is not available, the 
sunflowers may be harvested with a sled to which knives have been 
attached or with an ordinary corn knife (fig. 4). Either of these 
methods of harvesting should be used only in an emergency. Many 
farmers have reported that it is necessary to pay farm laborers 
increased wages when such work is in progress. 



TIME TO CUT SUNFLOWERS. 



There has not been a sufficient number of experiments to determine 
definitely the best stage of maturity at which to cut sunflowers for 
silage. The Montana Agricultural Experiment Station (4, p. 20- 
21) conducted feeding experiments with two lots of silage; one from 




Fig. 4. — Cutting sunflowers for silage by liand. This metliod sliould be used only wliea 
the crop has been tangled by the wind or is too heavy for a row binder to handle. 

sunflowers cut early, when only 30 per cent of the plants were in 
bloom, and the other lot from sunflowers cut later, when 90 per cent 
of the plants were blooming. Unfortunately, no figures showing 
the comparative yields of silage for the two methods are given, and 
the results of the feeding test are not conclusive. The dairy cows 
fed on the early-cut silage produced slightly less milk and butter 
fat, but gained more in weight than those fed on the late-cut silage. 
However, the cows fed the early-cut silage consumed a little more 
silage and grain than those fed late-cut silage. The evidence, there- 
fore, points to a slight advantage in the late cutting. The investi- 
gators conclude that sunflowers should not be cut for silage until 50 
to 60 per cent of the plants are in l)loom, not only because of the 



14 BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

apiDarent higher feeding value of the late-cut silage, but because 
there is also a greater loss of juices when the plants are harvested at 
an earlier stage. 

There has been trouble in several cases caused by the loss of juice 
from sunflower silage. At the field station of the United States 
Department of Agriculture, at Ardmore, S. Dak., 57 tons of sun- 
flowers were cut about August 25, 1920, and stored in a wooden silo 
12 feet in diameter. The silo was filled to a depth of 24 feet. Dur- 
ing the first month it was estimated that several thousand gallons 
of juice escaped through the cracks and around the doors. This 
loss of juice was accompanied by a shrinkage of 40 per cent in bulk. 
Other reports of the loss of juice from sunflower silage have been 
received. In several of these instances, however, the sunflowers were 
cut when one-third or less of the plants were in bloom. Such sun- 
flowers might be expected to produce " sappy " silage. 

At the Huntley, Mont., experiment farm in 1918 the sunflowers 
were harvested for silage when " on about one-half the plants seed 
heads were formed, and some were so far advanced that the seeds 
were in the hard dough stage. The remainder of the plants were 
in various stages of blooming." The silage made from this crop 
was not very readily eaten by the cows. This was seemingly due 
to the fact that much of the silage remained liard and woody in the 
silo. The report states that apparently the sunflowers were allowed 
to become too mature before harvesting to make the most palatable 
silage. 

At the West Virginia station (3, p. 2, 6, and 7) the sunflowers were 
cut for silage " when the majority of the seeds of the plants were 
in the light dough stage." No difficulty was experienced either in 
harvesting or ensiling the sunflowers at this stage of maturity, and 
none of the silage was refused or not eaten by any cow during the 
entire test. "After a few days the cows ate the smiflower silage 
practically as well as corn silage." 

The composition of sunflower plants at different stages of ma- 
turity is shown by a series of analyses made at the West Virginia 
Agricultural Experiment Station in 1919 (.?, p. 3). Additional 
work of this nature has also been done by Shaw and Wright (18) 
of the United States Department of Agriculture. They found that 
sunflower plants 3 feet high contained 84.87 per cent of moisture; 
6 feet high, 86.02 per cent; in first flower, 84.09 per cent; with rays 
ready to fall, 83.9 per cent; with rays dry and partly fallen, 75.58 
per cent; with rays all fallen, 74.37 per cent; and when the seeds 
were hard and mature, 69.68 per cent. This decrease in the percent- 
age of moisture as the plant grows older conforms more nearly with 
the conditions existing in other plants than do the continuously high 
moisture percentages found at the West Virginia station. The sun- 



THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. 



15 



flowers used in the experiments of Shaw and Wright were grown at 
Beltsville, Md. Corn grown in the same field had 68.69 per cent of 
moisture at the time it was sufficiently mature to put in the silo. 

The average amount of moisture in sunflower silage, as shown in 
Table 2 of this bulletin, is 77.8 per cent. This is less than that of 
silage made from immature corn and only 6.9 per cent greater than 
the percentage of moisture in silage made from mature corn. 

The results of Shaw and Wright also indicate that the percentage 
of proteids in the plant steadily declines as it matures. The sugar 
content also decreases. The greatest difference, however, is in the 
starch content. In corn at the time it is ready for the silo 24 per 
cent of the dry matter of the plant is starch; in the sunflower less 
than 1 per cent is starch. The starch and sugars combined consti- 
tute 37 per cent of the total dry matter of the corn plant and only 
11.2 per cent of the sunflower plant. 

Shaw and Wright conclude from their chemical data that the best 
time to cut sunflowers for silage is when the ray flowers have become 




'i '^^^^^m^^m^S^^^^^^ 



-■^i-~ '■ 



Fig. 5. — Low flat-topped wagons save much hand labor in loading sunflowers to be hauled 

to a silo. 

dry and are partly fallen. Judging from the limited information now 
available regarding the use of sunflowers for silage, it is best to cut 
the crop before the seeds have reached the hard dough stage. Most 
writers advise harvesting sunflowers for silage when only 50 to 60 per 
cent of the plants are in bloom. Decision regarding the best stage of 
maturity at which to cut will depend somewhat on location, espe- 
cially as to rainfall and atmospheric humidity. In dry climates the 
plants can be harvested at an earlier stage of maturity than in humid 
climates. 

FILLING THE SILO. 

For hauling the sunflowers to the silo low flat-topped wagons, 
such as are used for hauling corn silage, are desirable (fig. 5). The 
ordinary silage cutter can be used for sunflowers, but one with a 
wide throat is desirable in order to accommodate the large heads. 
The knives should be adjusted to a quarter-inch cut and bolted on the 
cutter securely, because the stalks of the sunflower are somewhat 
hard and woody. 



16 



BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 



Little trouble will be experienced in cutting sunflowers if the 
plants are fed into the silage cutter tops first. Sunflower silage 
packs more easily than corn silage. If harvesting has been de- 
layed for any reason until the sunflowers are older and somewhat 
dry it will be necessary to add water along with the silage. With 
such silage more care is required to tramp it down thoroughly. 
Sunflowers usually produce an inferior quality of silage if har- 
vested later than the blooming stage. 

A word of caution is necessary in regard to the strength of the 
silo used in storing sunflower silage. Those who have had experi- 
ence in ensiling sunflowers find that they pack much more closely 




■-* cr^ ""^-^ Z 




Fig. 6. — Filling with sunflowers the 200-ton concrete silo on the United States Sheep 
Experiment Station near Dubois, Idaho. 

in the silo than corn. This close packing, of course, means heavier 
silage and in large silos results in much greater pressure on the 
walls of the silo. George M. Rommel, formerly Chief of the Animal 
Husbandry Division, Bureau of Animal Industry, United States 
Department of Agriculture, is authority for the statement that a silo 
constructed to hold 200 tons of corn silage will hold nearly 300 tons of 
sunflower silage. 

Rommel says that a new monolithic concrete silo 14 feet in 
diameter and 50 feet high was built with 6-inch walls and the ordi- 
nary quantity of metal reinforcement on the United States Sheep 
Experiment Station near Dubois, Idaho, in 1920. (Fig. 6.) This 
silo, while it was being filled with sunflowers that fall, began to 
crack from the pressure when it was little more than half full. Fill- 



THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CEOP. 17 

ing had to be discontinued and the silo reinforced with steel bands 
in order to save it. Rommel found on inquiry that many farmers 
in the Northwest who had filled their silos with sunflowers had 
had similar experiences. 

One of the hoops on a wooden silo at Huntley, Mont., burst while 
the silo was being filled with sunflowers, making it necessary to re- 
inforce the silo with an iron band. Inquiries addressed to the Mon- 
tana, Washington, and Oregon agricultural experiment stations, 
however, elicited the information that no trouble of this kind had 
been encountered at those stations, and none had been reported to 
them by farmers. 

Nothing definite is yet known about the comparative pressure 
exerted on the silo walls by corn and sunflower silage. No advice 
can be given, therefore, as to the additional reinforcement necessary 
for silos intended to hold sunflowers. Care should be used, how- 
ever, in building such a silo, and the ordinary silo should be watched 
closely while it is being filled with sunflowers and until the settling 
process is completed. If it shows signs of cracking, serious trouble 
can be averted by reinforcing it with iron bands. 

YIELDS OF SILAGE. 

The yields of sunflower silage have been consistently larger than 
those of corn or other silage crops in the northern part of the 
United States and the higher altitudes of the Rocky Mountain region, 
where the temperatures are low during the summer season. The 
results of the more important of these comparative tests are listed 
in Table 1. 

Where the yields are recorded for different rates of seeding, as at 
Huntley, Mont., that given in the table was obtained from drilled 
rows 30 to 36 inches apart, because drilling in rows is the more com- 
mon method of culture and the one which no doubt will be most 
widely used by farmers. This method has not always given the 
largest yield, as will be seen by reference to the paragraph on the 
rate and method of seeding. The average yields of sunflowers, corn, 
and sorgo are not given, because these three crops w^ere not all grown 
at a sufficient number of the stations to make the averages comparable. 
In the first series of yields from Guelph, Ontario, the Mammoth Rus- 
sian variety of sunflowers, which made the second highest yield 
among the sunflower varieties tested, is compared with the second 
highest yielding varieties of corn and sorgo. In the second series 
the Black Giant variety of sunflower is compared with Wisconsin 
No. 7 corn and Orange sorgo. These varieties made the highest 
silage yields, respectively, of each of the crops under test. 



18 



BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 



Table 1. — Comparison of the yields per acre of sunflou-er, corn, and sorgo silage. 

[Yields obtained under irrigation are given in italic figures ; tho«e not in italic were 
obtained without irrigation.] 





Year. 


Yields per acre (tons). 


Locality. 


Sun- 
flowers. 


Corn. 


Soigo 
(cane). 




1919 and 1920 

1918 


all. 6 

28.4 

1.6 

22.5 

7.0 

23.1 

19.9 

13.0 

36.8 

31.1 

a 33.6 

3.3 

19.4 

32.9 

27.8 

12.0 

20.0 

4.3 

10.5 

3.0 

8.3 

12.6 

12.8 

15.2 

a 16.3 

10.0 

18.3 

25.0 

15.5 

18.0 

18.0 

24.4 

17.1 

20.3 

39.0 


a6.0 
10.8 










1917 






1920 






Do 


1920 








1917 


14.2 
13.0 
10.0 




Do 


1918 






1919 






1915... 




Do ' 


1916 




Do 


1917 and 191S 

1920 

1917 

1918 

1919 

1919 

1919 

1920 

191.S 

1919 

1920 

1917 

1918 








2.6 

10.5 
9.3 
10.4 








Do 




Do 








State College, N . Me\ 


15.0 
3.9 
6.1 
2.0 
4.0 
blO.4 
8.2 

10.4 
a 14.6 

10.0 


20.0 










Do 




Do 




Newell S. Dak 




Do 


cll.3 




1920 

1917 to 1919 

1919 

1918 •. 


15.5 


Scottsblufi , Nebr 










15.6 




1919 








1919 

1919 

1919 

1895 

(d) 

C) 
1919 


11.0 
8.5 
7.5 


















1.-). 8 
16.9 

14.0 


16.7 




17.2 











a The yield given is the average for the years specified. * 

b The corn yields listed are those of the Payne White Dent, the highest jaeldiiig variety which matured 
sufficiently to make good silage. Red Cob corn, a southern variety, iiiade an average yield of 13.15 tons per 
acre for the two years, but was so inimatiu'e when harvested that the silage was of very poor quality. 

c The Red Amber sorgo was too immature when harvested to make good silage. 

d Average yields of Mammoth Russian sunflower and White Cap Yellow Dent corn each for 13 years 
and Minnesota Amber sorgo 15 years. 

e Average yields of Black Giant sunflower and Wisconsin No. 7 corn each for 13 years and Orange 
sorgo 15 years. 

There are other tests of these crops mentioned in a^jriciiltiiral litera- 
ture, but no definite yields are given. In the Quarterly Bulletin of 
the Michigan Agricultural College for May, 1920, it states that in 
1919 careful estimates of the yields on eight farms in Ogemaw, Grand 
Traverse, Otsego, and Emmet Counties showed that " on an average 
sunflowers yielded 20 per cent greater tonnage per acre than the corn 
groAvn in the same fields. On the college farm at East Lansing, a 
3-acre strip of sunflowers produced a 30 per cent greater tonnage than 
an equal area of corn adjacent." C. B. Tillson, county agricultural 
agent of Clinton County, N. Y., writing in the Rural New Yorker, 
February 21, 1920, says that there were 30 tests of sunflowers in Clin- 
ton County in 1919 and that in many instances the sunflowers out- 
yielded corn from 30 to 35 per cent. He adds that the sunflowers out- 



THE SUXFLOWEE AS A SILAGE CBOP. 



19 



yielded the corn most whei-e the conditions were least favorable for 
the corn. He believes that sunflowers Avill be grown most extensively 
on farms unsuited to the production of silage corn. 

The yields shown in Table 1 seem very favoralilo to sunflowers 
because the tests were made mainly in those regions where the large- 
growing varieties of corn suited for silage purposes are not adapted 
to the climatic conditions. It can be said also that a large part of 
these yields was obtained under irrigation, (Fig. 7.) Where the 
crops can not be irrigated and in localities where silage varieties of 




P"'IG. 7. — Suulloweit. giovvu lur .^iliige idirpuscs iiiider irrigatioii on tin/ .Scutl^ljluH lit'clauia- 
tion project, near Mitchell, Nobr., 1917. Yield, 22.9 tons per acre, green weight. 

corn mature properly, the coiuparative yields of corn and sunflowers 
are much less favorable to the latter. 



FEEDING VALUE OF SUNFLOWER SILAGE.' 

Considering the fact that only a few years have elapsed since an 
interest in the use of sunflowers for silage was created by the experi- 
ments at the Montana Agricultural Experiment Station in 1915. a 
comparatively large number of feeding experiments have been car- 
ried out. Most of these indicate that sunflower silage when properly 
made is equal to corn silage for milk-production purposes. Sun- 
flower silage has also been fed at the Montana station to beef cattle, 
breeding ewes, and brood sows with good results. 



Trepared with the advice and cooperation of the Animal Husbandry Division of the 
Bureau of Animal Industry, United States Department of Agriculture. 



20 



BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGPJCULTURE. 



COMPOSITION AND DIGESTIBILITY. 

The composition of sunflower silage, as shown by chemical analyses, 
compares very favorablj^ with that of corn and the sorghums. While 
somewhat lower in carbohydrates or nitrogen-free extract than the 
corn and sorghums, it is, on the other hand, higher in fat and protein. 
The analyses made at different places are presented in Table 2. 

Table 2. — Comparison of the composition of sunfloicer, corn, and sorghum silage. 



Kind of silage. 



Num- 
ber of 
sam- 
ples. 



Sunflower t 4 

Do 3 

Do 1 

Do 1 

Do 3 

Do 1 

Do 1 

Average (weighted) . ^ 1-1 

Corn I 730 

Corn stover i 6 

Sorghum j 16 



Constituents (per cent). 



Water, 



78. 6 
78. 5 



67.8- 



76.2 
82.3 



69.8 
77.9 



77.8 



Ash. 



1.6 
2.4 



2.3 
3.0 



2.5 
2.2 



pro- 
tein. 



2.1 
2.4 



1.9 
1.9 



3.1 

1.7 



Crude 
fiber. 



6.8 
5.8 



7.5 

4.S 



9.1 
6.4 



6.3 



Nitro- 
gen- 
free 
extract. 



10.4 
9.8 



11.0 
7.3 



14.6 
10.0 



10.4 



70.9 


1.4 


80.7 


1.8 , 


77.6 


1.7 



2.4 


6.9 


1.8 


5.6 


1.5 


7.1 



17.5 
9.5 

11.0 



Ether 
extract. 



0.5 
1.1 



1.2 

.7 



1.8 



Authority. 



Mont. Bui. 131, p. 14.a 
Jour. Agr. Res., v. 18, p. 

327. 
M.J. Blish, for silage from 

Ardmore, S. Dak. 
W.Va.Circ.32, p.3. 
U. S. Dept. Agr., Bu. 

Chemistry. 
U. S. Dept. Agr., Anim. 

Hus. Div.ft 
Wash. Bui. 158, p. 11. 



.9 |l Farmers' Bulletin 1240 
.6 '}■ "Feeding Farm Ani- 
1. 1 mals." 



a The silage used in tliese analj'ses was made from sunflowers harvested when only 5 per cent of the 
plants were in Islooni and tlierefure without mature seeds. 

'' This analysis was made lay Dr. M. J. Bhsh.of the Montana Agricultural Experiment Station. The 
sunflowers were grown in 1920 by the Animal Husbandry Division on their sheep ranch near Dubois, 
Idaho. 

The percentage of digestible nutrients in sunflower silage has been 
determined by the Montana Agricultural Experiment Station and the 
results are given f ulh' in Bulletin 134 of that station {10) . The silage 
used in these experiments was made from sunflowers cut when only 
5 per cent of the plants were in bloom. This explains the low per- 
centage of fat (ether extract) shown by the Montana analyses in 
Table 2. The coefficients of digestibility as determined for this silage 
were as follows : Crude protein, 59.88 ; crude fiber, 42.33 ; nitrogen- 
free extract, 69.75 ; and ether extract, 70.63 per cent. 

Table 3 shows that the silage made from sunflowers is not equal 
in digestible nutrients to that made from corn. The amount of diges- 
tible crude fiber and nitrogen-free extract combined is higher in 
corn silage than it is in sunflower silage, but this difference is partly 
balanced by the higher percentage of digestible fat in the sunflower 
silage. 



THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. 



21 



Table 3. — Dvjestihle nutrients in 100 pounds of snnflover, corn, and sorghum 

silage. 





Animals 
used. 


Digestible nutrients (pounds). 


Nutritive 
ratio. 




Kind of silage. 


Crude 
protein. 


Crude 
fiber 
and 

nitrogen- 
free 

extract. 


Ether 
extract. 


Authority. 


Sunflower 


3 steers.. 
...do 

3 cows . . 

3 sheep.. 
...do 


1.24 
1.14 
.97 
1.10 
1.00 


10.13 

10.85 
7.72 
9.02 

C8.17 


0.37 
.85 
.91 
.95 

1.45 


8.8 
11.2 
10.1 
10.6 
11.4 


Mont. Bui. 134, p. 8. 
W. Va. Cu-c. 32, p. ^.b 

Ijour. Agr. Res. v. 20, p. 881. 

Wash. Bui. 158, p. 11. 


Do 

Do 


Do 


Do 


Do. (average) . . . 


1.09 


9.30 


. 91 10. 4 








Com 


1.39 
1.04 

.87 


17. 39 
10.78 
12.92 


. 67 13. 5 
.45 11. S 

.82 Ki 4 






Farmers' Bulletin 1240, " Feed- 


Sorghum '• 


ing Farm Animals." 











a This figure was incorrectly given as 9.8 in Mont. Bui. 1.34. 

b The coefTicients of digestibility for sunflower silage determined in the Montana experiments were 
used in computing the digestible nutrients of the silage made in West Virginia to show the difference in 
results when a silage made from more nearly mature plants is considered. It is recognized that this method 
is subject to criticism, but the results, it isbelieved, are approximately correct. 

c In Washington Bui. 102, p. 15, this figure is given as 8.29. 

PALATABILITY. 

There are some clifFerences of opinion regarding the palatability of 
sunfloAver silage. Most of the evidence from feeding trials conducted 
in the United States and Canada leads to the conclusion that even 
though animals may hesitate at first to eat sunflower silage freely, 
they soon become accustomed to it and, with the possible exception 
of corn silage, show no preference between it and other kinds of 
silage. In a number of instances where adverse reports were made 
as to the palatability of sunflow'er silage, it is apparent that the crop 
was not in the right condition when it was put in the silo. At the 
Huntley (Mont.) and Scottsbluff (Nebr.) experiment farms the sun- 
flowers were not always cut before the seed had reached the hard 
dough stage, and some of the silage remained hard and woody in 
the silo. 

It is difficult to determine just why the sunflower silage is so uni- 
formly good at Bozeman, Mont., and so often of poor quality or at 
least low" in palatability at Huntley, in the same State. Chemical 
analyses of sunflower plants grown at Huntley show a lower sugar 
content than plants growm at Bozeman. This deficiency in sugar 
may diminish the fermentation processes necessary to produce good 
silage. A similar difference in the composition of the plants may 
explain the difficulties which have been encountered at Scottsbluff, 
Nebr. Holclen {9, p. 26-28) , in his report for the years 1918 and 1919, 
says that while cows ate the sunflower silage in 1917 very well when 
it was fed for short periods alternating with corn silage, they did 



22 BULLETIX 1045, U, S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUEE. 

not eat as much of it as of the corn silage. In 1918, when they were 
fed on sunflower sihige continuously for a considerable period, both 
dairy cows and beef cattle ate the sunflower silage very well at first, 
but after 10 days or two weeks they would not eat as much. " It 
seemed the longer the}' were fed sunfloAver silage the less they would 
clean up. The coavs also dropped off in their milk flow." 

In 1919 Holden added to the sunflower silage about 10 per cent, 
by weight, of molasses from the sugar factory. Dairy cows, beef 
cattle, and fattening lambs ate this silage fairly well, but even 
with the molasses added they did not relish it as well as they did the 
corn silage. 

At the Wisconsin Agricultural Experiment Station the leaves of 
the sunflower plants had been killed by rust and drought so that the 
crop was in poor condition when it was ensiled. T. E. Woodward, 
in charge of the silage experiments at the experiment farm of the 
Dairy Division of the United States Department of Agriculture at 
Beltsville, Md., reports some difficulty in getting dairy cows to eat 
the sunflower silage, although its quality appeared to be good. De- 
tails are lacking regarding the condition of the sunflowers when they 
were put into the silo at the Michigan station. It is impossible, 
therefore, to explain its apparent lack of palatability. With the ex- 
ception of the above-mentioned reports and that of the Pennsylvania 
experiment station (see p. 24) there has been little complaint about 
the palatability of sunflower silage. 

At the Montana ^Agricultural Experiment Station' cattle, sheep, 
and hogs ate sunflower silage readily and in sufficient quantities to 
prove its availability in the rationing of these animals. The West 
Virginia, Wyoming, and Idaho experiment stations, the University 
of Saskatchewan, and the Manitol)a Agricultural College, in addition 
to numerous farmers, all report that sunflower silage is relished by 
dairy cows. It is safe to say. therefore, that silage made from sun- 
flowers wdiich are in good condition and at the right stage of de- 
velopment when cut will in most cases be consumed readily by dairy 
cows and most other kinds of live stock, with the possible exception 
of horses. 

COLOR, TEXTURE, AND ODOR. 

Good sunflower silage is usually a dark olive-brown color, much 
darker than corn or sorghum silage. In texture it compares favor- 
ably with corn silage when the sunflowers have been harvested at 
the right stage of maturity and stored properly. Most of the com- 
plaints regarding the texture of sunflower silage are the result of 
harvesting the crop too late. When the plants have been allowed 
to stand until the seeds are in the hard dough stage or even nearer 
ripe, the stems become woody and do not soften up in the silo. 



THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. 23 

Sunflower silage has a peculiar odor, which is rather strong, 
resinous, and somewhat sour, but not offensive. This odor may be 
one of the reasons why cattle sometimes hesitate to eat the silage 
when it is first offered to them. 

ACmiTY OF THE SILAGE. 

A determination of the acidity of sunflower silage was made by 
the chemical department of the Idaho Agricultural Experiment 
Station in 1919 {IS). Three samples were used in the determinations. 
Samples 1 and 2 were taken from the silo at depths of 2 and 6 
feet, respectively. Both of these samples were somewhat spoiled, 
as indicated by the dark color and disagreeable odor. Sample 3, 
on the other hand, seemed to have undergone a normal fermentation 
and had a good color and no disagreable odor. The total acids, con- 
sidering only sample 3, were found to be 1.37 per cent. The acidity 
of corn silage made from corn cut when the kernels were in the 
glazed stage, as determined by the senior author of the above-men- 
tioned article, varied from 1.34 to 2.16 per cent in 1915 and was 
1.81 in 1916. For oat-and-pea silage it was 1.66 and for wheat-and- 
pea silage 1.61 per cent. All these samples were taken from large 
silos, and the percentages are given on the basis of the composition 
of the silage as sampled {12). 

As will be observed from these experiments good sunflower silage 
is less acid than corn silage or the silage made from a mixture of 
peas and small grains, and there can be no objection to it on account 
of its acidity. 

RESULTS WITH DAIRY CATTLE. 

The Montana, West Virginia, New Mexico, and Washington agri- 
cultural experiment stations, the Manitoba Agricultural College, and 
the University of Saskatchewan all report favorable results in feed- 
ing sunflower sUage to dairy cows. At variance with their results 
are the rather unfavorable reports from the Pennsylvania and Michi- 
gan agricultural experiment stations and the Ignited States Depart- 
ment of Agriculture field stations at Huntley, Mont., and Scottsbluff, 
Nebr. 

The Montana Agricultural Experiment Station (^, p. 18-20) in 
a series of feeding experiments found that good sunflower silage can 
be substituted for a large part of the hay in a dairy cow's ration 
without diminishing the quantity of milk produced. The results 
indicated that 3f pounds of the silage equaled 1 pound of choice 
alsike-clover hay and 2.83 pounds 1 pound of good alfalfa hay. 

Sunflower silage was compared with corn silage in feeding ex- 
periments with dairy cows at the West Virginia, Pennsylvania, 



24 BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

Michigan, and Washington agricultural experiment stations, at the 
United States Department of Agriculture field stations at Huntley, 
Mont., and Scottsbluff. Nebr., and at the Manitoba Agricultural Col- 
lege. The conclusions arrived at by the experimenters diiTer mark- 
edly. It is impossible to determine from available data just why 
the sunflower silage was palatable in one case and not in another. 
There are a sufficient number of failures, however, to indicate that 
more care and judgment are necessary to make good sunflower silage 
than to make good corn silage. 

At the West Virginia (3) station the cows fed on a sunflower- 
silage ration produced per cow a daily average of 27.93 pounds of 
milk and 1.05 pounds of butter fat, while those fed corn silage pro- 
duced an average per cow of 29.17 pounds of milk and 1.05 pounds of 
butter fat daily. In this test the milk produced by the cows fed 
sunflower silage averaged 3.74 per cent of butter fat and that pro- 
duced from the corn-silage ration 3.60 per cent. At the Washington 
station (£0) the cows ate more silage and less grain during the 
periods when given corn silage than while they were being fed sun- 
floAver silage. During the sunflower-silage periods the cows pro- 
duced more milk but lost a few pounds in weight. While fed corn 
silage there was an appreciable gain in weight. The authors of the 
report conclude that sunflower silage in this test was approximately 
92 per cent as valuable as corn silage. At the Manitoba Agricul- 
tural College (1) a feeding trial was carried on with seven cows 
from December 19, 1919, to April 1, 1920, the conclusion being that 
the cows maintained their milk flow and body weight fully as well 
on the sunflower silage as on the corn-silage ration. 

The Pennsylvania station ^ conducted a feeding test with sunflower 
silage in the winter of 1919-20 and with silage one-half sunflowers 
and one-half corn in the winter of 1920-21. In each case the stand- 
ard of comparison was a good quality of corn silage. In the first 
test the cows while feci sunflower silage averagecf 19.3 pounds of 
milk and 0.92 pound of butter fat per cow daily ; while they were 
fed corn silage the average production per cow was 22.2 pounds of 
milk and 0.98 pound of butter fat daily. When the cows were 
changed from corn silage to sunflower silage there was a decrease 
of 23.5 per cent in the milk and 18.5 per cent in the butter fat pro- 
duced. When the cows were changed from sunflower silage to corn 
silage there was an actual increase of 2.3 per cent in the milk pro- 
duced, notwithstanding an advance of six weeks in the lactation 

^ This preliminary statement of results obtained with sunflower silage by the Pennsyl- 
vania station in 1019 and 1920 was supplied by S. I. Bechdel, professor of dairy hus- 
iiandry at the Pennsylvania State Collegre. A complete report on the sunflower-silage 
feeding experiments will be published by the Pennsylvania Agricultural Experiment 
Station. 



THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. 25 

period. The sunflower silage, which was fed to the limit of the 
cows' appetites, proved unpalatable. Considerable trouble was ex- 
perienced in getting the cows to eat enough of it. In this test the 
milk from the cows while fed sunflower silage averaged 4.75 per cent 
of butter fat and while on corn silage only 4.39 per cent. In the 
feeding test with the mixed corn and sunflower silage the cows 
produced an average of 20.2 pounds of milk and 0.88 pound of butter 
fat per cow daily, and 21.8 pounds of milk and 0.94 pound of butter 
fat daily on the corn silage. Again there was a decrease, in this 
case 14.5 per cent, in the milk produced when the cows were changed 
from corn silage to the mixed silage containing sunflowers. The 
corn silage used in the first test contained 30,6 per cent and the sun- 
flower silage 26.6 per cent of air-dry matter. In the second test the 
corn silage contained 32.9 per cent and the mixed silage 25.8 per cent 
of air-dry matter. 

Prof. Bechdel states his conclusions as follows : " From a study 
of the complete data of these experiments it is concluded that the 
use of sunflowers as a silage crop is not advisable on Pennsylvania 
farms except in a very few localities where corn is not always a sure 
crop. A mixture of sunflowers and corn, the crops being grown 
either alone or together, affords no advantage when the poorer quality 
of silage and the added difficulty of harvesting are taken into con- 
sideration." N 

The Michigan Agricultural College {11) reported that the milk 
production fell off 11.65 per cent when cows were changed from corn 
silage to sunflower silage. When the cows were taken from a sun- 
flow^er-silage ration and fed both corn and sunflower silages in equal 
portions there was an increase of 7.06 per cent in the millv produced. 
When the change Avas made from this mixture of silages to pure corn 
silage there was again a decrease of 5,58 per cent in the milk pro- 
duced. The results in Michigan seem to indicate that sunfloAver 
silage is less efficient than corn silage as a milk-producing feed, but 
that a combination of the two silages is preferable to either. 

Holden (P, p. 27) in his report of the work at the Scottsbluff 
(Nebr.) Experiment Farm for 1918 and 1919 makes the following 
comment on the value of the different silage crops under test at that 
station : " From the data available at this experiment farm it is be- 
lieved that the extra tonnage from silage corn over that from field 
corn will more than make up for the better quality of the field corn. 
It is further believed that the ensilage from silage corn is sufficiently 
higher in quality to offset tlie greater yield of sunflowers." 

Sunflower silage was compared with sweet-sorghum silage as a 
feed for dairy cows at the New Mexico station {10) in the winter 



26 BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUEE. 

of 1919-20. The author of the report states the results as follows: 
'' The cows did not consume the sunflower silage as readily as the 
'cane' silage, and they sometimes left a small quantity of it; but, 
notwithstanding this fact, the total amount of milk produced on 
sunflower silage was greater than that produced on ' cane ' silage." 

In a short feeding test at the University of Saskatchewan (5) 
sunflower silage was compared with oat silage as a roughage for 
dairy cows. The former produced slightly more milk, pound for 
pound, than oat silage. 

The results at. the University of Saskatchewan are supported by 
the report of the county agricultural agent of Wallowa County, 
Oreg., in the Farm Journal of January, 1921, p. 68. In response 
to a campaign for a wider use of sunflowers for silage, 14 silos were 
filled with sunflowers in 1919. Field peas and oats had previously 
lieen the chief silage crop of that county, and the sunflower silage 
proved more satisfactory than the pea-and-oat silage. 

Another matter of considerable importance to the butter maker 
has developed in the feeding of sunflower silage at the field station 
of the United States Department of Agriculture at Ardmore, S.Dak. 
F. L. Kelso, farm superintendent, claims that considerable difficulty 
was experienced in manufacturing a satisfactory grade of butter 
while the sunflower silage was being fed. He says, in correspondence 
dated June 17, 1921 : " It seemed almost impossible to get the butter 
to harden, although the flavor was fairly satisfactory. An ordinary 
churning required from an hour to an hour and a quarter while 
this silage was being fed. Under ordinary circumstances when corn 
or cane silage is fed it requires approximately 15 minute's to churn. 
The first churning that was done after discontinuing the feeding of 
sunflower silage required 22 minutes." This question of the effect 
on the butter is important and so far has been investigated very 
little. 

Notwithstanding these adverse reports, the conclusion seems war- 
ranted that good sunflower silage is worthy of consideration as a con- 
stituent in the rations of dairy cows in localities where better silage 
crops are not available. 

FEEDING TESTS WITH BEEF CATTLE. 

The Montana Agricultural Experiment Station reports tests m 
feeding sunflower silage to beef cattle of practically all sizes and 
ages. Calves were fed, with good results, rations in which one-half 
or more of the roughage was sunflower silage. It was learned, how- 
ever, that calves could not be put on a heavy feed of silage too 
rapidly ; when this was done they went " off feed." This difficulty 
was not encountered with mature cattle. Two-year-old steers were 



THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. 27 

fed a limited ration of sunflower silage only for 30 days with good 
results, and mature beef cows thrived when fed sunflower silage 
in the morning and hay in the evening. 

At the Wyoming station it was observed that cattle preferred the 
sunflower silage to good alfalfa hay or oat-and-pea silage. The 
silage was found especially valuable in Wyoming as a substitute for 
pasture during the winter, keeping both dairy cows and beef cattle 
in a thrifty growing condition. 

The New Mexico station also fed sunflower silage to beef cows and 
young beef stock. It was compared with sweet-sorghum silage for 
this purpose and found to equal the latter in feeding value. What 
difi^erence there was in the gains produced favored the sunflower 
silage {16). 

At the University of Alberta {2) at Edmonton 54 steers were fed 
for 140 days in a comparison of three kinds of silage. Eighteen 
head were fed oat silage; 18 head, oat-and-pea silage, and 18 
head, sunflower silage. The steers had all the silage and hay they 
desired in addition to a two-thirds grain and linseed-oil meal ration. 
The oat and oat-and-pea silages were both first-class. The sunflower 
silage was not so good, because the crop had to be harvested while 
it was immature. From 2 to 20 per cent of the plants were in bloom 
and one field was frosted before harvest. No difficulty was experi- 
enced in getting the steers to eat sunflower silage, and there was no 
trouble from scouring even while they were consuming 73 pounds 
of silage a day. In this experiment oat silage ranked first in rapidity 
and economy of gains, sunflower silage second, and oat-and-pea 
silage third. 

There is little doubt from these experiments that sunflower silage 
can be used with good results in the rations of beef cattle. 

USE OF SUNFLOWER SILAGE, IN FEEDING SHEEP. 

During the winter of 1917-18 the Montana Agricultural Experi- 
ment Station conducted an experiment in feeding sunflower silage 
to breeding ewes. This test was designed to indicate the value of 
sunflower silage in replacing a part of the alfalfa hay in the ration. 
The lot fed hay and oats was under test for 77 days, and the lot fed 
hay, silage, and oats for 74 days. The average gain per ewe during 
the test period was 13.2 pounds for the hay-fed lot and 12.4 povmds 
for those in which silage was included in the ration. This slight 
difference in gain was due for the most part, perhaps, to the slightly 
greater quantity of oats received by the first lot. The conclusion 
reached by the experimenters was that in feeding breeding ewes 2^ 
pounds of sunflower silage is equal to 1 pound of alfalfa hay. No 
unfavorable results were noted in feeding the sunflower silage either 
before, during, or after lambing. 



28 BULLETIN 1045, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUEE. 

The Washington station (i'/", p. 17) found that " a lot of pure-bred 
lambs made an average daily gain of 0.225 pounds each when fed 
a daily ration of 1 pound barley, one-half pound cull beans, four- 
fifths pound of pea straw, and 2|. pounds of sunflower silage." At 
the same station they were able to maintain breeding eAves in good 
condition on a daily ration consisting of 2 pounds of alfalfa hay and 
3 pounds of sunflower silage. 

At the Wyoming station sunflower silage was fed to growing ewe 
lambs in conjunction with native hay and three- fourths of a pound 
of a grain mixture daily. In a 42-day feeding period this group 
of lambs averaged 0.16 pound of gain daily. A similar group fed 
a like ration in which pea-and-oat silage was substituted for the 
sunflower silage averaged only 0.145 pound of gain daily. 

The United States Sheep Experiment Station near Dubois, Idaho, 
completed about April 1, 1921, a 55-day feeding test on 1,700 ewes,, 
with the following daily ration for each sheep : 

Sunflower eusilaj^e 2 pounds. 

Alfalfa hay 1| pounds. 

No. 2 yellow corn i pound. 

The silage was fed from racks 12 feet long, each of these racks 
accommodating 18 to 20 ewes. The first day half a pound of ensilage 
for each sheep was distributed. The quantity was gradually in- 
creased till the fifth day, when the full 2 pounds, with If pounds of 
hay and one-fourth pound of corn per head, were fed. This ration, 
divided into two feedings, was continued through the test. 

In this band of sheep were 1,300 pregnant Rambouillet and cross- 
bred ewes from 2 to 7 years of age and 400 ewes coming yearlings the 
following spring, all in good condition at the beginning of winter. 
They were held on the range until a heavy snow on December 15; 
then taken to the feed lot and given 4 pounds of alfalfa hay per head 
daily until January 28. Because this hay was of poor quality the 
sheep lost condition during the period. From January 29 to March 
24 the sheep received the ration mentioned above, containing sun- 
flower ensilage, without hay the last five days, when open range was 
substituted. The test ended on March 24 when the sunflower ensilage 
was exhausted. At that time the entire band of sheep was stronger 
than at the conclusion of the alfalfa-hay feeding period on January 
28, and was in good condition for lambing, with strong-stapled well- 
grown fleeces. Although the sheep had not tasted ensilage before 
this test, they ate it readily after the second day, preferring ensilage 
to hay. Only two died during the period, neither death being due 
to ensilage poisoning. Only three ewes were noticed that had lost 
their lambs. 

Since no water was available at the feed yard the sheep ate snow. 
Although the sheep wintered well on the feed as described, it is be- 



THE SUNFLOWEE AS A SILAGE CROP. 29 

lieved that the ration could be improved by the addition of more 
sunflower ensilage. 

FEEDING SUNFLOWER SILAGE TO HOGS. 

The Montana Agricultural Experiment Station (4, p. 25-26) has 
done the principal work in comparing sunflower silage with alfalfa 
hay in a ration given brood sows. It was found that the sows would 
eat sunflower silage readily. During a part of the feeding period 
they consumed 4 pounds per head daily, in addition to a small 
quantity of skim milk and grain. The silage was fed for two months 
before farrowing began, throughout the farrowing period, and for 
a jDeriod of about four weeks thereafter, with no unfavorable results. 
It is acknowledged by the authors of the report on these experiments 
that but little of the grain in the ration can be replaced by sunflower 
silage. It did serve an excellent purpose, however, in keeping the 
sows in splendid condition, being as satisfactory in this respect as 
alfalfa hay. 

SUNFLOWERS AS A SOILING CROP. 

Sunflowers have been fed as a soiling crop to dairy cows by a 
number of experimenters, with good results. The chief disadvan- 
tage of this method of feeding is that the plants must be run through 
a cutter before they are used. 

The Montana Agricultural Experiment Station (4, p. 22) com- 
pared sunflowers to corn as a supplement to pasture. Both crops were 
cut as needed and run through a silage cutter before being given 
to dairy cows during the latter part of their grazing season. " The 
cows ate the green sunflowers readily, kept up their milk flow, and 
apparently did well on the feed." The conclusion reached was that 
under the conditions of the experiment as described the sunflowers 
and corn were of equal feeding value. 

A more extensive feeding test was later carried out at the same 
station, comparing sunflowers and corn as soiling crops. Six cows 
were fed all the chopped sunflowers they would eat and another 
six cows all the chopped corn they would eat. Both lots had access 
to a small pasture and in addition received the same grain ration. 
At the close of the test the corn was in the roasting-ear stage and 
the sunflowers were about 40 per cent in bloom. The cows fed sun- 
flowers produced an average of 39.4 pounds of milk and 1.41 pounds 
of butter fat and those fed corn 38.1 pounds of milk and 1.38 pounds 
of butter fat per cow daily. During the feeding period of 28 days 
the cows fed sunflowers lost 7.8 pounds and those fed corn 20.4 
pounds of live weight. The slight difference in results favoring sun- 
flowers is no doubt due very largely to the fact that one cow in the 
corn-fed lot went " off feed " during the period. The results seem to 
confirm those of the first test and justify the conclusion that sun- 
flowers can be used effectively as a soiling crop for dairy cows. 



30 BULLETIN 1045, V. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUBE. 

DISEASES OF SUNFLOWERS. 

Rust^ is the most destructive disease of sunflowers, (Fig. 8.) 
It is common in southern Russia and has been reported at several 
points in the United States. Rust was prevalent on these plants 
at Hays, Kans., in 1920, and has done considerable injury to sun- 
flowers in experiments at both the Michigan and Wisconsin stations. 
It decreases very decidedly the yield and also results in a poor 
quality of silage. 

The best method of preventing rust injury appears to lie in the 
development of a rust-resistant variety. Frank Spragg and E. E. 
Down, in rejwrting on a variety test of sunflowers at the Michigan 




Fig. 8. — Mammoth liussiau sunflowers with the lower leaves killed by nist at tbe Hays 
Branch Station. Hays, Kans., 1920. 

station in 1918 (see Mich. Agr. Quar. BuL, v. 2. no. 3, p. 128-129, 
1920), claim for the South American variety Kaeurpher a certain 
measure of rust resistance. It may be, therefore, that a resistant 
variety will soon be found. 

Some work in breeding a rust-resistant sunflower has been done in 
Russia, It was found by the investigator, F. A. Sazyperov, that 
the ornamental sunflower [Tlelianthus agyrophyJlus) is resistant 
to the rust. None of the ordinary commercial varieties are known 
to be rust resistant. Hybrids were therefore made between one of 
the commercial varieties and the ornamental sunflower. In the 
second generation one-fourth of the hybrid plants were found re- 
sistant to the rust, although the season was exceptionally favorable 
to the spread of the disease. Among these resistant plants were 

"Rust {Puccinia IteliantlU Schw.), the damplng-ofC fungus (Pythium deban/atmm 
Hesse), downy mildew {Plasmopara MlstecHi Farl),, powdery mildew (Eri/siphe ci- 
clwracearum) , and wilt {Sclcrotiiii-a sp.), in addition to the parasitic plants Orohaiiche 
cumana Wall, and Ilomcosonia nehulella Hb. are all said to attack sunflower plants. 



THE SUNFLOWER AS A SILAGE CROP. 31 

individuals which appeared interesting from an agricultural stand- 
point. Sazyperov concludes, therefore, that it is possible to obtain 
an agricultural variety resistant to the rust. 

INSECTS ATTACKING SUNFLOWERS. 

In the warmer and drier parts of the United States insects do 
considerable damage to sunflowers. At both Amarillo and Chilli- 
cothe, Tex., the stalks of the sunflowers were girdled by a larva or 
white grub which resembled very closel}^ the larva of the June bug. 
This larva worked at or just below the surface of the soil and usually 
killed the plant completely or injured it so badly that all growth 
ceased. Another insect, also at Chillicothe. girdled the stalk just 
beneath the head, causing the head to drop over. 

Besides the above insects several forms of beetles and grasshoppers 
infest the heads of sunflowers at blooming time and do considerable 
damage to the seed crop. In 1918 and 1919 grasshoppers very much 
reduced the yield of sunflowers at Scottsbluff. Xebr., by eating out 
the terminal bud before the plants headed. Thrips are often abun- 
dant on the heads, and aphides, or plant lice, occur in quantity on 
the leaves. Sunflowers are, however, less injured by chinch bugs 
than corn, and in some localities where these insects are trouble- 
some sunflowers may prove valuable in replacing corn as a silage 
crop. 

Strangely enough, these insects are all less abundant on sun- 
flowers in the regions of low summer temperature where the plant 
promises to be most important. Cockerell (6') presents a partial 
list of the insects which are known to visit sunflower in Colorado, 
but in most cases he ^does not indicate the damage caused. 

LITERATURE CITED. 

Anonymous. 

(1) 1920. Manitoba: — Sunflower ensilage for milk production. In Agr. 
Gaz. Canada, v. 7, no. 10, p. 818-819. 

(.2) 1921. Silage for fattening steers. (Summary of report by A. A. 
Dowell and G. L. Flack, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Can- 
ada). In Nor'-West Farmer, v. 40, no. 11, p. 627. 

(3) Anthony, Ernest L., and Henderson, H. O. 

1920. Sunflowers vs. corn for silage. West Va. Agr. Exp. Sta. Circ. 
32, 8 p., 1. fig. 

(4) Atkinson, Alfred, Nelson, J. B., Arnett. C. N., .Joseph, W. E., and 

Tretsven, Oscar. 
1919. Growing and feeding sunflowers in Montana. Mont. Agr. Exp. 

Sta. Bui. 131, 29 p., 4 fig. 
(.5) Bracken. .John. 

1919. Saskatchewan :— Sunflower silage. //( Agr. Gaz. Canada, v. G, 

no. 6, p. 542-543. 



32 BULLETIN 1045, U, S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUEE. 

(6) COCKEKELL, T. D, A. 

1914. The entomology of Helianthus. In Entomologist, v. 47, no. 614, 
p. 191-196. 

(7) Hansen, Dan. 

1920. The work of the Huntley Reclamation Project experiment farm 
in 1918. U. S. Dept. Agr. Dept. Circ. 86, 32 p., 5 fig. 
HoLDEN, James A. 
<8) 1918. The work of the Scottsbluff Reclamation Project experiment 
farm in 1917. U. S. Bept. Agr., Bur. Plant Indus., West. Irrig. Agr. 
(W. I. A.) Circ. 27, 28 p., 1 fig. 
(9) 1921. The work of the Scottsbluff Reclamation Project experiment 
farm in 1918 and 1919. U. S. Dept. Agr. Dept. Circ. 173, 36 p., 
2 fig. 

(10) Joseph. W. E., and Blish, M. J. 

1920. Studies on the digestibility of sunflower silage. Mont. Agr. 
Exp. Sta. Bui. 134, 8 p. 

(11) Michigan Agricultukal Expekiment Station. 

1920. Sunflower silage. In Mich. Agr. Exp. Sta. Quart. Bui., v. 2, 
no. 4, p. 163-164. 

<12) Neidig, Ray E. 

1918. Acidity of silage made from various crops. In Jour. Agr. Re- 
search, V. 14, no. 10, p. 395-409. Literature cited, p. 408^09. 

(13) and Vance, Lulu E. 

1919. Sunflower silage. In Jour. Agr. Research, v. 18, no. 6, p. 
325-327. 

<14) Palmer, Edward. 

1871. Food products of the North American Indians. In U. S. Dept. 
Agr. Rpt., 1870, p. 404-428, pi. 19-28. 

(15) Putnam, G. W. 

1920. Sunflower experiments. In Mich. Agr. Exp. Sta. Quart. Bui., 
V. 3, no. 2, p. 49-52, 2 fig. 

(16) Quesenberry, George R. 

1920. Crops that may be used for silage. In N. Mex. Farm Courier, 
V. 8, no. 4, p. 4-6. 

<17) ScHAFER, E. G., and Westley, R. O. 

1921. Sunflower production for silage. Wash. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. 162, 
20 p., 4 fig. References, p. 19. 

(18) Shaw, R. H., and Wright, P. A. 

1921. A comparative study of the composition of the sunflower and corn 
plants at different stages of growth. In Jour. Agr. Research, 
V. 20, no. 10, p. 787-793. Literature cited, p. 792-793. 

(19) Wiley, Hakvey W. 

1901. The sunflower plant : Its cultivation, composition, and uses. 
U. S. Dept. Agr. Div. Chem. Bui. 60, 31 p., 2 tig.. 1 pi. 

<20) W^OODWARD, E. G. 

1920. Sunflower silage vs. corn silage. In Wash. Agr. Exp. Sta., 30th 
Ann. Rpt., 1919/20 (Bui. 158), p. 18-20. 

O 



LIBRARY OF CONUHtbb 




